1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. Of the appeal costs, the part arising between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is the Defendant.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to D vehicles (hereinafter “Plaintiff vehicles”). The Defendant is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract with respect to E vehicles (hereinafter “Defendant vehicle”). The Defendant’s assistant intervenor is the driver of the Defendant vehicle.

B. On August 17, 2017, between 18:10 and 18.20 on August 17, 2017, the Plaintiff’s vehicle was in office in accordance with three lanes in front of the Seocho-gu Seoul F Building, and the Defendant’s vehicle was driving on the direction direction, etc. to attempt the two lanes of the said road from the front line rather than the Plaintiff’s vehicle.

C. However, the Defendant’s vehicle, when the Plaintiff’s vehicle and the Defendant’s vehicle move ahead of the Defendant’s vehicle, was changed to the Defendant’s three-lanes, and the vehicle turned back to the front side of the Defendant’s vehicle after the driver’s seat while changing the vehicle to the Defendant’s three-lanes.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). D.

After that, on August 25, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,963,210 as insurance money after deducting KRW 200,000 of the self-paid cost for the repair cost of the Plaintiff’s vehicle due to the instant accident.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 4, 6 through 9, Eul evidence 4 and 8 (including additional numbers)

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s instant accident occurred in the course of changing the lane of the Defendant’s vehicle, which is caused by the total negligence of the Defendant’s vehicle, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the insurance proceeds of KRW 1,963,210, and damages for delay.

B. The instant accident occurred as the Plaintiff’s vehicle was changed from the three lanes to the two lanes, and the Defendant’s vehicle was shocked from the two lanes to the two lanes, and thus, the entire negligence of the Plaintiff vehicle was caused.

3. Determination

A. The evidence and pleading mentioned earlier are facts acknowledged prior to the ratio of negligence.